As propaganda goes, one would be hard pressed to find a nastier, more noxious piece than Sander Gilman’s Newsweek op-edon the horrifying fact that Paul Nehlen tweeted that he was reading my book, The Culture of Critique. Here’s Nehlen’s tweet:

Nehlen committed the horrible sin of simply saying that he was reading the book, not endorsing it. But for this he has beenpilloriedin the media and disowned by the likes of Steve Bannon (just as well; I have lost all respect assuming his remarks in Michael Wolff’s book were quoted accurately). After the over-the-top title, “The Alt-Right’s Jew-Hating Pseudoscience Is Not New,” we are greeted with photo of a KKK rally, the implication being that Nehlen and I endorse such things, or perhaps that the KKK spends their spare time reading my book.

This is ridiculous. Nehlen is a sincere Christian who is deeply concerned about the transformations to the U.S. brought about by immigration and multiculturalism; he is fighting the good fight against Ayn Rand groupie, open bordersSpeaker of the House Paul Ryan. And for my part I won’t dignify the juxtaposition of the KKK with my work as worthy of a response. My writing speaks for itself.

Gilman’s main point:

MacDonald’s claim is that Jews use anti-Semitism as a means to further their own advancement—indeed, that anti-Semitism is a Jewish tool to advance a society that is in competition with white, Christian culture. There is little need to explore MacDonald’s rather dreary work, as I have done so in much greater detail in my 2016 co-authored book, Are Racists Crazy? How Prejudice, Racism, and Antisemitism Became Markers of Insanity. What interests me much more is that MacDonald (and Nehlen) stand in a long line of anti-Semites who invented, and then reinvented, a new science to prove the inequities and corruption of those people that they label “Jews.”

Unfortunately, Gilman’s rendition of the thesis of Culture of Critique has nothing at all to do with the thesis of the book, which is all about Jewish ethnic activism on the left, particularly as regards immigration and several intellectual movements that have been very influential in the academic world. One of the main points is that, like Gilman, a main motivation of these intellectuals was to end anti-Semitism by attempting to de-emphasize the Jew/non-Jew distinction (often by invoking leftist universalism) or by portraying anti-Semites as psychiatric cases. Indeed, Gilman is nothing if not a Jewish academic activist himself, so it’s no surprise that he engages in both of these subterfuges in his op-ed.

His book, Are Racists Crazy?, would be an excellent addition to CofC because it would fit right in with the chapters on psychoanalysis and the Frankfurt School where I discuss how Jewish activists have developed theories in which ethnocentric White people, or indeed, all White people who have strong family relationships and a sense of historical belonging, are seen as having a psychiatric disorder — the “fundamentally political program of indicting gentile culture and especially gentiles who represent the most successful and culturally approved members of their society” (185). Gilman epitomizes an important theme of CofC — that any sign of ethnocentrism among non-Jews is seen as a pathology whereas the massive elephant in the room of Jewish ethnocentrism is never discussed.

Gilman’s statement that “those people they they label ‘Jews'” illustrates another theme of CofC — that these intellectuals de-emphasized Jews as a social category. As I note in the chapter on the Frankfurt School, “a consistent theme in Chapters 2–4 is that a major thrust of Jewish intellectual movements since the nineteenth century has been to devise theories that minimize the importance of the social category Jew-gentile while allowing for the continuation of a very strong sense of Jewish identity.” “Those people that they label ‘Jews'” suggests that the category of Jews is really a figment of the imagination of anti-Semites. It’s just a label that anti-Semites use to describe people they want to prove are, to paraphrase Gilman, unequal and corrupt. But of course the category of Jews is far more than simply a label used by people that Gilman labels “anti-Semites.” And there can be little doubt that Gilman has a very strong sense of Jewish identity and sees his work as advancing Jewish interests — the common denominator of all the Jewish intellectuals reviewed in CofC.

The point of CofC is that Jews and non-Jews often have different interests in the construction of culture, and that Jewish activists like Gilman have attempted (and largely succeeded) in creating a culture that serves Jewish interests while compromising the legitimate interests of non-Jews. I document this with hundreds of references, mainly to Jewish authors (including Gilman’s book on Freud).

Amazingly, Gilman includes as a pseudoscientist (and “anti-Semite”) anyone who thinks that Ashkenazi Jews are smarter than non-Jews (Charles Murray, Richard Herrnstein [!!], Gregory Cochran, Henry Harpending) as well as anyone who thinks Jews are Jews are “stupid” (Eugen Dühring). He could include mein the list of people who accept the empirical evidence that Ashkenazi Jews have a higher IQ than non-Jews, a literature I first reviewed in Chapter 7 of A People That Shall Dwell Alone. But for Gilman, any labeling of Jews at all, whether positive or negative,) is off-limits. Hence his book Smart Jews:The Construction of the Image of Jewish Superior Intelligence in which my original writing on Jewish intelligence is included as an example of invidious labeling of Jews by someone with nefarious intent. For Gilman, IQ is nothing more than a social construct used to make invidious portrayals of individuals and groups, thus ignoring 100+ years of research on arguably the most studied and best established psychological trait with a host of important real-life correlates (see this articleby another notorious anti-Semite, Linda Gottfredson).

Gilman’s attitude about Jewish IQ is consistent with the point I make above — that he does not want to have any labeling of Jews at all. If labeling of Jews is off-limits, then any negative labels are off-limits. His program is to place empirical research on Jews as a group as off-limits because such research might show Jews in a negative light and hence compromise Jewish interests. A preemptive strike, if you will. Hence Joe Biden’s faux pasin effusively praising Jews as a group:

Joe Biden should know the ground rules by now. You can praise the contributions of individual Jews. It’s totally permissible to wax eloquent on the accomplishments of Sigmund Freud [bad example; Freud was a pseudoscientist par excellence], Jonas Salk, or Albert Einstein—perhaps even implying that humanity would never have come on these ideas and thus be infinitely poorer for it. … You can even praise the Jewish community’s role in enacting public policy on which there is a broad consensus, such as the Civil Rights movement.

But you can’t imply that Jews have real power and have used it to push America in directions most Americans don’t want to go or obviously conflict with the legitimate interests of other groups—particularly Whites. …

In particular, as noted also at TOO, Biden claims that Jews have been at the vanguard of gay marriage. We at TOO have also noted Jewish domination of the gun control movement and their responsibility for the mainstreaming of pornography and for the sexualization of culture. Jewish neocons with their power in the media and in the government were the main force behind the costly war in Iraq. And by far most importantly Jews have been the main force behind displacement-level non-White immigration(see also here regarding the current push for yet more massive increases in non-White immigrants). Biden cheerfully says, ““The embrace of immigration” is part of that, as is the involvement of Jews in social justice movements.”

[Biden:] “Think behind of all that, I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry. The influence is immense, the influence is immense. And, I might add, it is all to the good.”

But that is a mistake. Banning honest discussions of Jewish power is the linchpin that protects Jewish power.

A corollary of this de-emphasis on the category of Jews as a group is that, while the movements discussed in The Culture of Critique (and Gilman’s Are Racists Crazy?) portray ethnocentric Whites as having a psychiatric disorder, the ethnocentrism of arguably the most ethnocentric group in history is never discussed in this literature. And by implication, if we follow Gilman’s lead, labeling Jews as ethnocentric would be off-limits just as labeling them smart, stupid or influential is off-limits.

He tells you he doesn’t exist as he whines about Jews being the world’s biggest victims: 6 million !

Why would Gilman whine about Jews being picked on if they do not exist? It’s like picking on people chosen at random. I’ve never understood why it was worse to hurt a Jew than a White man. But it is harder to figure out the answer when we are told that Jews do not even exist.

Gilman doesn’t insist in his article that all races have the same IQ. His specific claim is that Jews are not smarter than other races. They are not smarter than Haitians, for example. But what he really wants us to think is that Jews are White people just like you and me. It is easier to push that false idea if he doesn’t insist that Jews are also indistinguishable from Blacks.

Gilman’s article doesn’t challenge the racist idea that Whites and Blacks are in different categories. In fact, you will never find an article by a Jewish author claiming that Africans are just as smart as Jews. Instead, they will claim that Africans are just as smart as Whites. Or they will say that Jews are smarter than other people, or not smarter than other people (depending on whether they are writing in the morning, or in the afternoon).

I confess I have not yet read your The Culture of Critique, Dr MacDonald. But this remark of yours bothers me: ‘He could include me the list of people who accept the evidence that Ashkenazi Jews have a higher IQ than non-Jews.’ Well, I have no reason for accepting this evidence. Yet I have taught European Jews and Gentiles, and been a student among them, for many years, in several countries. I have come upon highly intelligent and very stupid specimens in both groups. But as a group, ‘Ashkenazi Jews’ do not stand out as equipped with a higher IQ than are ‘non-Jews’. Unfair examining, very evident in higher-education establishments in the US, does produce false evidence in favour of Jews. (This is not also the case in European or Australian universities.) Representation of Jews and Gentiles in top-job contexts is also a useless observation deck, for attainment of those jobs is not only, nor even the primarily, a factor of intelligence. Rather, it tends to be the extended Jewish hand to the tribe that fills a disproportion number of those jobs with Jews. And of course, it is hardly news that at least a third of annual Nobel Prize recipients have to be Jews, for it is so specified by the big-money patrons of this Prize. Indeed, Jewish superior intelligence is a carefully nurtured great big lie.

If the characteristic of being sleazy translates to higher intelligence, that would be the only denominator for the Ashkenazi and Khazarian. Otherwise another false myth to throw in the dustbin like the black man’s superior cocksmanship or sports ability

Very evidently Blacks are more gifted in SOME sports, like running and some more. Cocksmanship? They are marginally more gifted than White men on that. That’s what they were selected for. Then IQ-wise? Look at all kinds of charts. If you want a stupid child that cannot hold the job of his dream, like Kaepernick, go with Black men. You will have to raise the baby alone, because it is in the genes of Bantu men to impregnant women and then fool around for more women. Jewish IQ? I have talked too long about that. Sleazy yes. Smart, I don’t see them. All Jews that I have ever known are overrated, all of them.

Might I ask, for the benefit of the regular visitors to this pro-White website, at precisely what moment in your life did you suddenly turn into a self-hating, castrated and emasculated, totally lacking in any faintly detectable or biologically measurable degree of masculine self-confidence and declare yourself to be the embarrassing CUCK that you just now confessed to, with your comment?

“Cocksmanship? They are marginally more gifted than White men on that. ”

You sound like the sort of pathetic White guy who posts ads on craigslist, soliciting for black men to come service your White wife or girlfriend because you have convinced yourself that you are not up to the task yourself.

I have an IQ of 148 in Wechsler scale. Wechsler happens to be Jewish. My claim is compatible with my academic performance.

For the cocksmanship, in my youth I had the bathroom dip problem. It is one problem that aging solved.

The length of the penis depends on many things, including the height of the person. It depends on race. I have dated many Black and Arabian women. They told me that I was on the good side, I took this as a compliment. Many Arabian girls had excessively big vaginas, which made me think that it corresponds to the average genitals of men.

You don’t have to win each and every aspect and have it all. For the Jewish IQ for example, if Jews really had such an IQ, they wouldn’t need to be sleazy, nor would they have been chased 111 times from various countries, many countries multiple times. Even the Goyische Kop thing, it is because we are not sleazy, not because we are stupid. That Jews are actually just a specialized bloodsucking parasite, it shows from the fact that they always need a host. Even Israel needs a host. Without the billions that they suck yearly from White men, they would have gone nowhere.

Could you provide citation for the this sentence, thank you:
“And of course, it is hardly news that at least a third of annual Nobel Prize recipients have to be Jews, for it is so specified by the big-money patrons of this Prize.”

A citation? Hardly. The Nobel Prize finances are the best kept secret, possibly ever. We do not even know who its executives are. That is instantly suspicious; the big-boy banksters come to mind rather quickly. Then there are the universities: lots of interactions among them! It’s from them that we know of ‘Jewish person x’ who got the Chemistry prize this year; no-one knows why he, a totally undistinguished person. Take a look through any year’s list of Nobel Prize winners. Have you ever heard of that year’s winner in your discipline, before or since? If not, you will soon find out that he is a Jew, just by googling. And thus common knowledge is built.

MacDonald cited a number of researchers who have demonstrated Jews have a higher IQ (he left out Richard Lynn). He’s discussed it in other articles as well; including one that said, if I recall correctly, that Jews had a 7 time over-representation of IQs in the 125 to 140 range and a 4.5 over-representation in the above 140 range.

Personally speaking, I’ve met many Jews in my life and they definitely have higher verbal ability on average (often with characteristic histrionics and aggressiveness). They are frequently wimps, but they’re verbal ability gives them tremendous confidence (think maybe Howard Stern). But they aren’t very good at art and mechanics, however. See TOO review of Rothko’s work for an example.

So they are different across a spectrum of attributes and intelligence is just one thing that varies, which shouldn’t surprise. Anyway, the good news is that we don’t need them – we have a much higher number of absolute geniuses than they.

Mike, your comment is hard to understand. Whites are 7 times overrepresented in the IQ over 130, and Jews are 30 times overrepresented? I guess Indians, Chinese, Africans, South Americans must be underrepresented. Otherwise we run into that statistical trope of that city where everybody was more intelligent than the average of the city.

I do believe Jews seem to be slightly smarter than the average white person, but not by a lot. I was in gifted classes when I was a kid (back when they still measured IQ), and I don’t remember a significant number of Jews in my program, despite there being a lot of them in the school (I lived in Connecticut).

It’s also a fallacy to simply compare Jews to whites, because whites represent a very diverse population – everything from Sicilians to Scots to Russians, and everything in between.

@Sophie Johnsson. I couldn’t agree more.
This super ethnocentric group naturally uses their unparalleled influence in academia, the educational system and media to promote the most giftet/intelligent members of the tribe and the least talented White Goyim – along with not too bright “people of colour”. Unfortunately, folks are ignorant about this tribe’s power. That people has not a clue about it sounds understandable in Europe, where so many Jews have equipped themselves with goyish names and are posing as natives (Sweden, Germany, Poland). Furthermore, it is in all countries of Europe criminalized to name Jews in not quite praiseworthy circumstances. In Sweden, where I live, you still do not put yourself at risk of committing a felony by pointing out that a person advocating mass immigration is Jewish, but you definitely will be ostracized if you do so. Harder to explain why people aren’t aware of the tribe’s setting the tone in the USA, as quite a lot of the (((American geniuses))) do not hide their background.

You can believe what you want, but it is not necessarily supported by evidence. My experience is this: if you live in a big city, Jews don’t seem that much smarter than goys. But once you go into the countryside, you will start seeing some really dumb goys.

“If labeling of Jews is off-limits, then any negative labels are off-limits” Why cannot we do that to them. Per William of Occam there are no trees only Birch, Oak, Apple, etc trees. In a similar vein Madame Thatcher said there is no such thing as society only individuals. If “Jews” are off limits then why is not “White” off limits for the same reason i.e. there are only Irish, Chech etc and make off limits the use of whites. Just a thought.

Gus, that’s just another aspect of their double-standards, hypocrisies, and double-speak. Another example: “There is no such things as “White people”. Race is a social construct. We are all the same. White people are racist by birth.”

An article of mine “The Fraud of Freud” on “The Saker” website – http://thesaker.is/the-fraud-of-freud/?inmoderation – drew quite an interesting array of comments. Though the article does not mention Jews or Jewry, several commentators did. Whereupon another commentator took issue with that development, even indirectly calling for wholesale censorship of comments.
In response, yet another commentator inserted a quote from a book written by a Jew in the 1920s and therefore well before WW2. The book title is “You Gentile” and here is the quote:
“A century of partial tolerance gave us Jews access to your world. In that period the great attempt was made, by advance guards of reconciliation, to bring our two worlds together. It was a century of failure.”
More food for thought, I should think.

Prof. MacDonald: When was the last serious test of Ashkenazi IQ? CofC was published in 1998. The tests cited in the Wiki article on the topic are from the 1970s. In his investigation of Ivy League admissions, Ron Unz gives evidence for a major drop in Jewish academic performance in recent years. There are also high rates of out-marriage and genetic dilution among American Jews (who were, originally, mainly Ashkenazi). So my question is: Is Ashkenazi Jewish IQ still high? And if so, how do we know that?

Bill, that’s a great question and a great point. I trust the work of Murray and Rushton, they’re very thorough and honest researchers. The evidence pretty clearly points to a slightly higher IQ for Ashkenazis, focused on verbal rather than visual-spatial intelligence. I’m not sure why there’s so much resistance to this vs studies on the Igbo and East-Asians. It’s not like it’s not possible. But you make an excellent point: with high rates of out-marriage and dilution, those additive alleles that would likely be present would be removed from the group (and spread into the population they outbred with!) So, research that is brave enough to 1. separate the subjects for testing into ethnic groups that include Ashkenazis, 2. be valid tests for g, could pretty well determine if there’s been some reduction in the population’s intelligence.

The dirty secret of the Jewish Agenda. Jews claim to fight to destroy White Power, but Jews actually prize White Power. After all, without the support of White Power, Jewish Power would get nowhere. Jews are only 2% of the US. Without the support of gentiles, Jews couldn’t do much even if they have so much money. And the most talented and useful gentiles are whites. So, Jewish Power relies on the support of White Power. Jews don’t see White Power as a tiger or bear to hunt down and kill. If White Power goes, Jewish Power goes too.

In actuality, Jews see White Power as a Horse to capture, whip, tame, and ride. That way, the Jewish master horseman sits atop the White Horse, which is used to trample on Palestinians and Muslims in these Wars for Israel.
So, Jews seek to tame, harness, and control White Power than totally destroy it. It’s like any man with a horse. If he kills the horse, he has to walk on foot, and then, he has no speed and power. For him to have great power, the horse must be made to obey him and carry him on its back. It’s like that Steven Spielberg movie WAR HORSE. Jews see goyim as a horse to tame and ride.

This is why Jewish bitching about White Power is so bogus. Jews really rely on White Power to push the agenda of Jewish Power. Jews must ride the White Horse. So, Jews want White Power to continue BUT for it to serve Jews than have its own agency and independence. So, White Power is to serve Jewish Supremacism. If White Power seeks independence, liberation, emancipation, and autonomy from Jewish Power, then Jews flip out and accuse it of ‘white supremacism’.
Jews shame and defame white freedom & independence not because such is supremacist. It’s because if white power is free, it will no longer be enslaved to Jewish Power that is now in supremacist mode. A master fears the mere freedom of a slave because, once freed, a slave will serve his own interest than that of the master. So, in order for the slave-master to keep his supremacist power, he must shame the slave for daring to be ‘disloyal’ by having free will and agency.
Jews talk endlessly of their own Emancipation. Jews say women should be emancipated to serve their own interests. But when it comes to white gentiles, Jews say it’s evil for White Power to be emancipated to serve its own interests. No, White Power must be saddled, bridled, and reined to serve Jewish Supremacist Power.

This is why Jews are so contradictory. Even as they officially denounce White Power, they can’t do without it. After all, white gentiles are the ONLY people who feel sympathy for Jews. Blacks, Muslims, Hindus, Asians, and others don’t really care for Jews. Also, non-whites have far less ability and means to support the Jewish Enterprise and Agenda. It’s no accident that Jews gained the most wealth and power in nations where white gentiles have been the solid majority. If Jews had all moved to black Africa, how much wealth could they have accumulated surrounded by all those low-IQ savages and primitives? Jews gained most in white nations, especially in Northern European nations where gentiles have been smart, sober, and serious. They were the support system for Jews to make tons of money and gain influence.

In order to make White Power sacrifice its independence and autonomy in order to serve Jewish Power, whites must be tamed psychologically and emotionally with ‘white guilt’ and command words like ‘antisemitism’ and ‘racism’. And even ‘homophobia’ as Homomania is really a proxy of Jewish Power. By elevating the minority elite status of Homos, Jews seek to normalize the notion that the great majority should honor, worship, and serve the elite minority. Diversity is also used to control White Power. If the white horses are harnessed with non-white horses to pull the carriage and wagons for Jews, there will be even less chance for white horses to break free and run off to serve their own instincts and interests.

It’s about time the Horse of White Power said NO MORE to the Jewish supremacist rider. If indeed Jews are really opposed to White Power, why do they call on privileged white politicians, high-ranking white generals, successful white enterprisers, capable white engineers, and talented white managers to serve Israel, Zionism, and Wars for Israel? If Jews really hate White Power as something evil, why do they rely so much on White Power to serve Jewish interests? Why do Jews summon so much white talent and ability to serve the Jewish-Zionist supremacist agenda if white power is so evil? If White Power is so wicked, why do Jews want it to be so closely entwined with Jewish agendas and interests?

It goes to show that Jews don’t really want to hunt and kill White Power. They want to harness it, control it, and use it for their own tribal-supremacist interests.

It’s time for the white horse to unseat the Jewish Supremacist from its back. It’s time for White Emancipation, White Liberation, White Autonomy, White Independence, and White Sovereignty. Get the Jewish Master off your back.

Asian-Indians gained independence from British Imperialism by calling for Civil Disobedience. White Power can gain independence from Jewish Zio-Globalist Supremacism only by calling for Racial Disobedience. There must be White Racial Disobedience against Jewish Vice Industries(like gambling which should be boycotted), Zionist oppression of Palestinians, Wall Street bailouts, and Wars for Israel(where Jews use white gentiles to murder and kill Muslim gentiles, all the while hugging ‘Muslim refugees’ as salt-of-the-earth allies against whites).

And the question of every White Emancipationist to the Jew must be, “If you see our power as so evil, why do you ask us to serve your power? Why do you want our wicked power to serve your agenda?”

I have made this point repeatedly, that Jewry is not seeking the destruction of Whites so much as they are seeking to domesticate us…like a farmer would any other livestock. They seek our domestication for the very reasons you point out above, that we are useful to them.

Personally I find the prospect of our domestication even more horrific than our utter destruction.

Andrea, those are very informed ideas you have. Thank you for posting.

I used to agree that Jews would not want to destroy Whites because we are, to use your phrase, like the horse Jews tame and ride. Why would they opt to destroy that power?

I’ve since changed my mind, believing that Jews (or top Jews and their organizations) have decided that it is in fact in their best interest to destroy the White race (though they might keep a remnant around just in case). This argument was made best, in my view, by the NA’s Kevin Strom in a podcast he did last year. I’m sure readers can find a link to that.

Strom argued that Jewry so got its hair mussed in the unpleasantness that occurred in Europe in the 30s and 40s that they abandoned their age-old M.O. of “taming” and using us, and opted for extermination. I think the evidence since 1945 supports such an argument. Thus, replacement level immigration in White countries, promotion of race-destroying feminism and homosexuality, as well as race mixing, particularly with low-IQ blacks, etc. We can add the opioid crisis, which affects Whites significantly.

And my own little theory concerns that of “gene capture.” Though Jews work hard to prevent assimilation and intermarriage, there does seem to be evidence that they target the better White genes. Over time, they may “harvest” enough of those genes that Jewry becomes quasi-White. Many have commented on how Israelis often portray themselves as White Europeans with Aryan features. Do influential Jews now feel they have captured enough of our best genes that killing off the White race is now possible? The idea should be explored.

I would concur with you there, Edmund. Domesticating, milking, and holding White nations captive, has until now, usually been (((their))) modus operandi. Now, however, judging by organized Jewry’s own words and actions, they are obviously going for the kill.

“Strom argued that Jewry so got its hair mussed in the unpleasantness that occurred in Europe in the 30s and 40s that they abandoned their age-old M.O. of “taming” and using us, and opted for extermination. I think the evidence since 1945 supports such an argument.”

I agree that Jews seek to destroy whites but it’s will be ensnarement and enslavement than extermination. There’s no way Jews are going to wipe out 100s of millions of whites. But Jews can destroy white spirit with ‘white guilt’ and white unity with Diversity.
Jews know that whites, especially in democracies, cannot do much once diversity takes hold. As non-whites will vote with white cucks, white patriots won’t be able to gain enough power to save white nations. So, white race will continue to exist but their only option will be to serve Jews. Non-whites will side with Jews since Jews offer them more immigration and benefits. Also, Jews fill non-whites with anti-white hatred. Since whites won’t be able to take back power, their only option will be to just work and pay taxes while Jews rake in most wealth.

Via ensnarement and enslavement of Diversity, Jews will make it impossible for whites to act together to bring down Jews. After all, if Germany had been 40% non-white, the non-whites would have voted with the Liberals and communists against conservatives and National Socialists.
Look at California. Whites there will not be exterminated. But they cannot gain power since white Libs and non-whites vote to push the Jew-Homo agenda. So, white can work and pay taxes, but that’s about it. They can’t do anything for their own race and culture.

So, it depends on what is meant by ‘destroy’. I do agree that Jews are out to destroy White Will and White Independence. But they won’t and can’t wipe out the white race. That won’t happen. Still, Jews push jungle fever to destroy white male pride as more white women will go for ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs.

The Jews rode the British white horse into Palestine and when finished sent the exhausted nag to the glue factory. They’ve now mounted the American white horse and when the Middle East, Russia, and most importantly World Domination is secured, will have the poor beast ground into burger. They don’t dare, their lesson learned in the 1940’s, mount the European white horse, preferring to send in the hyenas and jackals to tear it to pieces.

To any honest biologist, the correct question is, “Are anti-racists crazy?”, at least if you define “crazy” as “behavior or beliefs that lead to sterility and/or untimely death.”

Without racism, what’s the point of having children when the world is already grossly overpopulated with 7.6 billion unique individual human beings just like yourself? Bring them here, and surely they will repay your kindness by providing you with a comfortable, dignified old age, just as your own children would do if you hadn’t aborted them!

We have to make a distinction between overall intelligence (what the heck is that, anyway, other than a score on an IQ test) and aptitudes. I would say aptitude for this or that is everything. We all know people who couldn’t “pass” an IQ test but can fix anything with no training whatsoever and in a just society would always be in high demand.

And we probably know even more folks who are noted for their “intelligence” but seem unable to get anywhere in life. So what is left? The Gift of the Gab and an ability to worm your way into a successful life. It’s all about success, which simply means achievement of one’s goal. Being judged one way or another by your IQ is tragic.

The intellectual clime in the USA/EU is reminiscent of the ex-Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Even the shut-up word “anti-Semitism”, blared by Gilman and his likes, has become so much watered down that it runs the risk of turning into a new badge of honor for many. Below are some of my posted tweets.
S. Gilman, @Newsweek live in tribal self-denial re @TOOEdit Accordingly, thinkers critical of Jews, i.e. Tacitus, Rabelais, Schopenhauer, Dickens, Mearsheimer, et al. must be banned as “anti-Semites.” Freudo-Marxism, once hailed as a science – now a scam
@realDonaldTrump & @TOOEdit. Witch-hunt against @pnehlen reminds me of communist witch-hunt in ex- E. Europe against readers of Solzhenitsyn, Djilas, Bukowski, Kołakowski etc. Same intellectual terror — different latitudes.

The utter hypocrisy and self righteous of Jews such as Gilman presents the question of whether they know the extent of the deceit they engage in, or if they are totally oblivious of it as a result of having zero self reflection and a belief in their lies

{Tentatively}- they “think” only two choices are possible- I must be God, or I am nothing. To be alive means to be God. Having a normal middle class life means I am not God- therefore I am nothing. Not acceptable!

The blind spot forces them to “think” this way. They cannot understand a normal White life- I am either special or I am dead!

Can anyone imagine Dr. Kissinger having a regular job?

Knock knock- “good morning, my name is Henry. I am here to fix your air-conditioning.” Impossible! He wouldn’t be special anymore and therefore he would be dead. . .the blind spot blocks understanding of perverse cognition.

Right: even a seeming defect may be adaptive in certain environmental niches. Evolution is only concerned with beneficial differentials. Whales and man share a common ancestor, yet whales, who have the remnants of a five fingered hand no longer have independent digit dexterity. They do not need it in their current environment and mode of life.

What do we say or do about the fake Jews and paid agents like Mana Truhill among others who have wreaked havoc on this country over the years by fomenting anti-Semitism and hate crimes falsely blamed on Gentiles? It is a tangled web that needs more attention than it gets. An Insightful and thought provoking article.

I took a look at the pseudo historian Gilman’s Op-Ed in Newsweek and he is a (pseudo) professor of history at Emory University in Atlanta. Perhaps that has something to do with why he would be allowed to write an op-ed for Newsweek. There is another well known pseudo historian at Emory University, the Jewish professor Deborah Lipstadt.

Lipstadt would not be known by anyone beyond her own university except that in the mid 1990’s she wrote a libelous book that targeted historian David Irving, saying among other things, that he was a “Holocaust Denier”. Up until that time David Irving was considered one of the top three or four historians of WW II, regularly producing international bestsellers. His books were reviewed regularly in the New York Times, The Times (of London) and all the top media organizations around the world. His books always had harsh critics too, as Mr. Irving dismantled many of the many lies and myths surrounding the war and its glorified heroes such as Churchill, who was exposed as corrupt as they come.

But with Lipstadt’s book and the determined efforts of World Jewry, their ownership of many of the publishing houses and media organizations, Jews were able to destroy David Irving’s lucrative career so that all the big publishers stopped publishing Mr. Irving’s books. Today you can buy them from his website.

Lipstadt received a lot of publicity last year when the Jews made a Hollywood movie about her. David Irving brought a libel suit against Lipstadt and in 2000 he lost his case against her. The judge said that Lipstadt and her publisher made some libelous statements against Irving, but what she wrote was not enough to convict her of libel. For losing the case against Lipstadt, Irving was stuck with a multi-million dollar bill. Lipstadt had hired many “experts” to testify on her behalf and they were each paid very large sums of money for their testimony and David Irving was held responsible for the costs of the trial. That’s how it’s done in England.

The other connection to the Irving-Lipstadt trial is Professor MacDonald. David Irving represented himself at the trial against Lipstadt’s Hollywood funded (including Steven Spielberg, who contributed a huge sum) multi-lawyered defense. One of the few people whose testimony he relied upon was Professor MacDonald. It is my understanding that Professor MacDonald was not present at the trial, but submitted testimony for Irving’s defense. And like Professor MacDonald’s book(s) and Irving’s I would assume (neither of whose books he has read, I would bet), that apparently bothers Lipstadt’s colleague Gilman a lot.

In the Op-Ed Gilman complains “MacDonald, for example, was the sole “scientific” witness speaking for David Irving in the 1996 case against the American historian Deborah Lipstadt, whom he accused of libel for labeling him a “Holocaust denier.” Irving was nevertheless convicted in spite of (or perhaps, because of) MacDonald’s testimony.” There are several things wrong with this sentence. The trial was in the year 2000 and David Irving was not “convicted” of anything. Lipstadt was on trial, not Irving. David Irving lost the case and was held responsible for the costs of the trial, largely payoffs to those who testified for Lipstadt.

I recall the publicity leading up to the trial in 2000 and how it was billed as the “holocaust” on trial, and I recall thinking no matter how the case went, David Irving would not be allowed to win. According to Sander Gilman’s Wikipedia entry he “is an American cultural and literary historian”. Although he’s obviously Jewish himself, Wikipedia does not mention that. Reading the short entry appears to show his whole career is devoted to his own people, largely glorifying them. And as we can see, any historian that doesn’t glorify them will be vilified. And that’s why Mr. Irving’s and Professor MacDonald’s books are banned and the Lipstadts (previously, a nobody) and Gilmans of the world are glorified.

Below I’ve submitted two interesting videos. In 1990 David Irving found (with the help of a German historian) Josef Goebbels diaries in a Moscow archive. They had been put there shortly after the war and laid there untouched until Mr. Irving discovered them in 1990. This generated great publicity, as these diaries answered many questions. Goebbels diaries went on for many years, starting well before the “NAZIS” came to power. When David Irving wrote his book on Goebbels, the Jews pressured St. Martin’s press to back out of the deal and refuse to publish the book. Despite the fact that St. Martin’s submitted the book for awards and could expect another blockbuster from Irving, they caved in to Jewish pressure. Here is a television debate on the affair, with Christopher Hitchens arguing against the censorship. Arguing against the book is Eric Breindel who appears to be Jewish. What a surprise.

This is a video of the Michael Hoffman’s magnificent speech on the Irving-Lipstadt trial and the veiled threats made by Deborah Lipstadt against David Irving and others. The video was banned from youtube for many years, until last year. It’s still banned in many countries. David Irving thanks Michael Hoffman and reveals what they found out after the verdict of the trial was rendered. The Israeli Ambassador was in the courtroom audience surrounded by armed guards. The first time guns were allowed in a British courtroom. The judge was aware of the presence of the ambassador and his armed guards. As Mr. Irving says, those armed guards would have been on the judges mind as he pronounced the verdict.

“A new science to prove the inequities and corruption of those people they label ‘Jews”? I like it! Frankly if my verbiage was more at ashkenazic level, I would use it as the opening quote for my blog Jewology: the science of making the would be invisible cultural vampires luminously visible. Pretty sure Dr. Gilman would sue the piss out of me for my troubles.

While reading Dr. MacDonald’s post I couldn’t help but think of Dr. Goebbels famous quote on naming the Jew. Clearly science does progress! For Dr. Goebbels only had in mind how much they prefer disparagement to being named. The only “kindness” they ask of us is that they be allowed to get about their business without too much trouble from us.

As to what that business is in the end, I must disagree with those here who hold it’s our “domestication”‘. I think that view gives Jews way too much credit. For it to be the case, Jews really would have to be the super high IQ geniuses they would like us to think, if not say, they are. No I instead view them as a cunning tribe of grifters just trying to stay one scam ahead of all their other scams. Not an expert but pretty sure evolution would not expect much more of them then that.

Psychometric ranking of Jews is always going to be fraught with sampling issues. It’s hard to imagine that retards from the inbred ultra-Orthodox are tested. In fact, I’m not sure that these communities are included at all, given the historic aversion to censuses.

To Trenchant’s point: I sometimes reflect on the Gospel of Luke and the Christmas story which references the Roman census of the Jews for taxation purposes. Joseph had to go to Bethlehem, which was his line’s (the House of David’s) ancestral home. Was this done to get a more accurate head count of a group who would likely have been less than cooperative? It might have been like the street grifters shell game in which rather than looking for a marble under the she’ll, the Romans were searching for a JEW who wished to avoid detection and thereby taxes.I believe it lends credence to the story.

A very good point – and just one more of very many examples of utterly inbred rat-cunning and millennia-old, bone-deep scheming and dishonesty by which Jews avoid the counts, the analyses, and the ensuing discussions which would open the eyes of the world to their presence and their activities.

Jews have a tendency toward emotional instability and hysteria when they feel nervous or threatened… which is all the time when they are not in absolute control. And they are arrogant, but uneasy, even then.

Jews are basically Arabian tribe which was not able to keep its land in competition with another Middle East tribes and was kicked out. So they have to disperse in foreign lands including Europe.. On the way they picked up some European genes which greatly helped to improve their intelligence.

However The base appeared to be the same Arabic mentality. Arabs well known for their endless feuding, betraying, forming new endless alliances, backstabbing. Etc. Unfortunately European Genes ( improved IQ ) made that kind of behavior much more annoying and disruptive

So average European (Well maybe except British ) probably would be bored to spent all his life in endless ape fight. Jews on another hand completely obsessed and spending all their time trying to achieve world domination. Jews are absolute leaders in writing books in social and political science and political activism

PS.
I have read time ago some popular article about baboons if I remember correctly. And its says that power games of baboons could put to shame any political games of humans.

Gilman draws more attention to Jewish power and makes Jews like himself obvious in their attempts to hide that Power Structure. The smarter person will see through these obnoxious attempts to undermine whites and other groups.
I started wondering about Jews around 2000 when I noticed the News portraying Jews in Israel as the main victim in that area. The Jews were driving down the street in large Tanks, while little Palestinian children threw rocks at them. At the same time I was researching the Banking industry, and read Secrets of Federal Reserve. From there it just kept branching out. Like a rabbit hole, it just keeps on going.

Prof. MacDonald refers to “Ayn Rand groupie, open borders Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.” Ryan is pro open borders but he rejected Rand’s philosophy since the 2014 congressional campaign. He never really understood it.

Prof. MacDonald might be disparaging Rand’s work when he uses the term “Ayn Rand groupie,” sort of implying that she is the object of a cult. The “Ayn Rand Institute” does give that impression, but it was created after her death and a good case can be made that the people behind the ARI have hijacked Rand’s reputation to serve their own agenda.

The website http://ARIwatch.com describes the hijacking in detail. It references Prof. MacDonald’s work in several places and links to some of his articles on its Links page.

Prof. MacDonald opposes the self-sacrifice of open borders and Rand helps provide a moral foundation for the fight. It’s true she was confused and confusing about race, and once made a stupid off-the-cuff remark about immigration during a Q&A (she wrote nothing about immigration), but her ideas correctly applied can be valuable to the nationalist cause.

When we resist and denounce Jewish anti-White policies, we are not working as a Jewish tool. But when the Jewish media make a big story about a swastika drawn in the snow, even though they won’t report how many Whites were raped, killed or mugged by non-Whites on the same day, that is clearly a Jewish trick.